Nelson,
You ask why my concern about copyright? For me, the terms and conditions imposed by many academic publishers, most of which are commercial organizations, are unacceptable and indefensible.
Copyright is an author's just entitlement and a right granted by statute. No serious writer should be required to forfeit his/her intellectual property. Equally, a serious publisher should not have to insist on such appropriation, even require that authors give up their rights to other mediums alongside other restrictions and also expect authors to do much of the publisher's traditional work.
Typically, the publisher justifies this by saying that publication gives the author 'professional recognition'. For this they characteristically offer the author nil payment, one gratis copy of the final book and the privilege of having to pay 50% of an inflated cover price for extra copies.
These conditions are a smokescreen, transparently an exploitation device at the expense of authors, who happen to be their main asset and whose work is, in the main, solicited. Brazen is one word for it, shameless is another. Bottom line is that authors are expected to be compliant and philanthropic but not the publisher.
For myself, I am not happy to associate my work and reputation with such publishers.
However surprised I might be that other serious writers would agree to forfeit their intellectual property and other rights, we know why they do it of course. Academics need to 'publish or perish' but this does not explain why commercial publishers should also offer such disrespectful terms. With most academic publishers operating in this discreditable way, the usual claim is that their terms and conditions are standard practice. But there are more equitable and professional ways in which to publish books.
To my knowledge there are several publishers who are taking this issue on board, mainly because of similar complaints by authors. The editor of one journal has told me that his publisher, whilst acknowledging the problem, is resisting big time and he is despairing of ever sorting it out. Another tells me they have a licensing alternative in mind that would allow authors to keep ownership and disallow certain types of exploitation to take place.
I'm not sure why the conventional publisher/author arrangements can't be used, whereby the author retains his/her copyright and allows the publisher publishing rights for the intended medium for an agreed royalty for a specified time. The publisher then has a separate agreement to pay agreed royalties on their sales to other mediums. Fairer but my guess is that such change would affect the bottom line, set a precedent and require publishers to admit their less-than-principled character.
Hope this helps.
Sincerely,
Arnold.
ak@corporate-amnesia.com
Dear Arnold,
Just out of curiosity, why are you concerned about the copyright of your paper? I have signed over the copyright on many papers and haven't thought of it as a serious limitation. Have I missed something?
Nelson
Sent from Nelson's Blackberry...please excuse innovative spellings...
-----Original Message-----
From: International Management Division Discussion <IMD-L@AOMLISTS.pace.edu>
To: IMD-L@AOMLISTS.pace.edu <IMD-L@AOMLISTS.pace.edu>
Sent: Tue Apr 22 22:10:57 2008
Subject: Suggesions please for an ethical publisher
IMD colleagues.
I have a 10,000-word Paper looking for a good home with a publisher that won't insist on me forfeiting my copyright. It's on a key issue that falls neatly into two subject areas – knowledge management and management education.
Suggestions please.
Thank you.
Arnold Kransdorff.